User:MichaelQSchmidt/workspace/ARS revamp

Wikipedia:Wikiproject Article Improvement Team

ALT one:

WikiProject Article Improvement Team is a WikiProject dedicated to building comprehensive and detailed articles on Wikipedia about topics related to films. Please feel free to add yourself to the project.


 * Goals
 * To standardize articles in Wikipedia
 * To improve weak Wikipedia articles by adding, expanding and improving them
 * To serve as a central point of discussion for issues related to improvable Wikipedia articles
 * To provide the necessary framework to assist in bringing all articles within the project scope to the highest possible quality

The project generally considers all articles within its scope. However, for organizational reasons, the project concentrates on articles in deletion discussions that may be salvable so as to improve the encyclopedia.
 * Scope

does not include articles about actors, directors and filmmakers; those are in the scope of the Biography WikiProject, most especially the Actors and Filmmakers and Screenwriters projects thereof. (Future tagging of bio articles relevant to specific task forces may be a future extension, however.)

Due to the size, scope and number of interested editors working on articles, the project has added several additional structures to keep the work organized:
 * Organization
 * Coordinators in charge of project organization and administration
 * Departments for specialized tasks across the whole of the project
 * Task forces to allow collaboration amongst editors interested in specific topics within the project-wide scope

OR Alt two



Welcome to WikiProject Article Improvement Team (AIT)

Sometimes Wikipedia articles about notable topics exist in poor form, are badly written, or improperly unsourced. Our deletion policy instructs that when articles are improvable they are usually not good candidates for deletion.... that as editors we have options other than outright deletion, and if an article facing deletion is suitably improved, it might remain to serve the encyclopedia and its readers.

Articles that may be written in poor form, that lack references, or need improvement, but whose topics are backed by reliable sources are usually worthy of editorial attention to address the issues. If proper sources exist to show a topic's notability, an article's simply being in a poor state is not a sufficient reason for deletion.

Inclusion of articles within Wikipedia is based upon verifiability and topic notability. Occasionally an article is nominated for deletion that simply needs the topic to be proven as notable and encyclopedic through the provision of available reliable sources on the AfD page for such an article. Better, and far more lasting, is when an editor proactively improves a weak article and then shares the results of his work at the AFD. The addition of reliable sources to articles in the form of inline citations to verify content is always an improvement, and also improves Wikipedia as a whole. Showing something was improvable is far better for the encyclopedia than simply saying something might be.

Remember the Article Improvement Team Code of conduct:

'''We are here to improve articles. We are not a voting cadre.''' "Article Improvement Team" is not about casting !votes at AFD... it is a Wikiproject set to improve the encyclopedia through improving articles being discussed for deletion. If you work on an article that has been listed as needing immediate assistance by AIT, try to add references and edit the content to address concerns raised in the AfD discussion. If you comment in an AfD discussion, try to describe which of the problems raised in the nomination you have fixed, and note any remaining deficiencies that others should be aware of (for example, lack of organization, structural problems, lack of balance, etc.) If an article has been rewritten, you may place a comment in the AfD as a courtesy. This will help the closing admin determine which version of the article the editors in the AfD were commenting on. Try to lead by example, through improving articles to better serve the encyclopedia and through discussion based on policy and guideline.

Please feel free to join this project! To view the project's list of content needing immediate improvement, please refer to Wikipedia"Article Improvement Team/"Improve It Now" list'''.

[[Image:Searchtool.svg|28px|Scope]] Scope
Wikiproject Article Improvement Team's main focus is on Wikipedia articles that are perceived as actually being notable that are going through Articles for deletion (AfD), that:


 * Need references
 * Are written poorly
 * Lack information readily available
 * Need cleaning up.

We also help improve content in main namespace (refer to Wikipedia: Namespace for more information) and other Daily deletion debates (XfD) processes, such as Miscellany for deletion (MfD) and Templates for discussion (TfD).

AIT members may also be interested in improving articles listed at Wikipedia: Listing of possible copyright problems. These articles often cover notable topics. Evaluating the extent of such problems can be difficult, but thoroughly rewriting articles with problems identified as foundational has the additional benefit of helping Wikipedia: WikiProject Copyright Cleanup.

Content list
A list of content for rescue consideration is located at Wikipedia:Article Improvement Team/"Improve It Now" list.

People icon.svg How to contribute
The Article Improvement Team WikiProject about editing and improving articles. AITS is no different from any of the hundreds of Wikiprojects in that we collaborate to improve Wikipedia. If everyone who cares about preserving important topics and removing unsuitable content even one article listed at a deletion discussion per day (or even one per week), the impact will benefit all our readers. Moreover, reading through an article nominated for deletion and adding sources and rewriting the text to remove or reword unsuitable content will help other editors decide if the article should be kept or deleted.

Does AIT wants to keep everything?
No. The AIT is not about making policy to ensure that nothing is deleted or casting keep votes in AfD discussions. The ARS ensures that articles that can be written to follow Wikipedia policies do not get deleted when they can be rescued through normal editing, which per WP:AFD means that it was not a good candidate for deletion. The So fix it and Solookitup templates are sometimes all that's required for a rescue.

Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion – why it's important to view


Every time an article is deleted, the contributions that were made to it are lost. Wikipedia administrators can access the information in deleted articles, but they are not necessarily experts on the article's topic. Once an article is deleted, its content, value, and appropriateness can no longer be evaluated by the general public.

In addition, the contributor who writes a poor article on a notable topic is likely to be inexperienced. If their first efforts are deleted, they may be discouraged and refrain from creating further articles, or even editing. Everyone starts somewhere, and we should encourage better writing and better articles. Good faith efforts to contribute should be met with encouragement to improve.

This makes Articles for Deletion (AfD) a very important place; one that deserves everyone's attention.

A common axiom is that "AFD is not cleanup". Consider that Wikipedia is a work in progress, and articles should not be deleted because no one has felt like cleaning them up yet. Remember, Wikipedia has no deadline. If there's good, sourceable content in the article, it should be developed and improved, not deleted. The Wikipedia policy of trying to correct problems in articles through editing improvements, expansion and adding reliable sources, which is addressed in detail at WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM, is often more appropriate than a complete deletion of articles.

The question on whether a poor but improvable article ought to be deleted is a major point of contention, and has given rise to the wiki-philosophies immediatism and eventualism. The Article Rescue Squadron was highlighted in a July 2007 Wikipedia Signpost, and has grown with many processes to tag, track, and list tagged articles.

Articles proposed for deletion (prod)
Sometimes articles are proposed for deletion (prod, prodded) without being sent to AfD, some of which may actually be notable per Wikipedia's General notability guideline.
 * Refer to Category: Proposed deletion and Category: All articles proposed for deletion to browse these articles.

Tips to help rescue articles

 * Browse Articles for Deletion periodically, and consider tagging articles that you feel meet notability guidelines.
 * Discuss issues concerning an individual article on that article's talk page, not on this project's talk page.
 * Read Guide to deletion for more tips.

Source searches



 * Google News
 * Google Book Search
 * Google Scholar
 * NewsLibrary.com


 * FindArticles.com
 * World Cat
 * Wikipedia Reference Search by the WRS project
 * Political Graveyard


 * Reliable newspapers

Article Rescue checklist
Here's a quick checklist of 10 steps anyone can take for an article that needs rescue (in no particular order of priority):
 * 1) Add WikiProjects – Look at the article's talk page to see if anyone has added appropriate WikiProject banners to the article.  WikiProject banners help draw attention to articles from editors who are interested in the subject.  You don't need anyone's permission to add a relevant WikiProject banner to an article talk page.
 * 2) Solicit WikiProject support – Many articles needing rescue merely need attention from an expert on the subject.  A short note on a WikiProject talk page seeking expert attention can bring remarkable results fast.
 * 3) Take the time to Strengthen the Lead – The Lead sets the tone for the rest of the article.  Take the time to rewrite the lead so that the article title and the contents of the article are in sync.  Nothing detracts from an otherwise notable subject, than a lead that doesn't do a good job conveying what the article is about.
 * 4) Find and add sources – It is most important that sources demonstrating the notability of a subject are added when they are found.  Do it properly, using the correct citation templates.
 * 5) Wikify the article – If an otherwise notable subject is just a bunch of unorganized content on the page, it is our job to clean it up when we find it and bring into line with our MOS.  Turn poorly formatted references into proper citation templates.  Add relevant sections.
 * 6) Positively engage the new editor – When you find that the article has been created by a new editor (maybe their first one) or by inexperienced editors, engage them in a positive, mentoring way.  Help them learn how to create and contribute better content.  Engage them on their talk pages, encourage and challenge them, and most importantly make them feel welcome. If there are policy or guideline issues on the table, don't just refer them to a policy link, engage them in a discussion to ensure they understand what they need to understand.  Even if the article is ultimately lost, this positive engagement will help us all turn new contributors into productive editors.
 * 7) Add Infoboxes and Nav Templates – If appropriate and they are not there, add and complete as much as possible the appropriate infobox.  Add relevant navigation templates.
 * 8) Eliminate orphaned articles – Link and cross-reference the article with other articles, lists and categories.  Make sure the article appears in the appropriate See also sections of related stuff. Look for sources and content in related articles that might enhance the orphaned article.
 * 9) Eliminate the junk – If there is unsourced or irrelevant content, copyvios, OR or other "junk" in the article, eliminate it ruthlessly.  If there is a question about the validity of content, start a discussion on the talk page and tag questionable content as necessary. Don't just ignore the "junk" if its there. Conversely, be sure to preserve appropriate content— as long as any of the facts or ideas added to the article would belong in a "finished" article. For more information, please refer to WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM.
 * 10) Treat the article as if it was your best achievement – Make changes to the article that will turn it into an article that you would be proud of personally.  We know how to do it, we just need to do it.

Articles currently tagged for deletion

 * Main page: Category: Articles for deletion

Articles currently proposed for deletion

 * Main pages: Category: Proposed deletion and Category: All articles proposed for deletion


 * See also: Wikipedia: Articles for deletion/Old/Open AfDs – Articles for deletion discussions that have finished their discussion period and are eligible to be closed following the deletion process.

Miscellany for deletion

 * 'Main pages: Wikipedia: Miscellany for deletion and Category: Miscellaneous pages for deletion

Files for deletion
Files for deletion (FfD) is a listing of images and other media files that are nominated as unneeded in Wikipedia. Files that have been listed at FfD for more than 7 days are eligible for deletion if either a consensus to do so has been reached or no objections to deletion have been raised.
 * Main page: Wikipedia: Files for deletion

Templates for discussion

 * Main page: Wikipedia: Templates for discussion

Article alerts

 * Main page: Wikipedia: Article alerts

Selected previous rescues

 * See a selected list of previous rescues at Wikipedia: Article Rescue Squadron/Hall of Fame

Article restoration
A number of articles have recently been deleted as Biographies that had been flagged for years as unsourced. The admins who deleted them have said they are happy for them to be restored providing any restored articles are then properly sourced and made fully compliant with WP:BLP (Biographies of living persons). These articles that are properly sourced will simply be restored. NB To restoring admins, remove any negative material (it's in the history so it can be readded when sourced) and watchlist the article. If it isn't sourced within 48 hours, please redelete it. Suggest maximum 4 articles per restoration session, please check they were deleted for being unsourced BLPs and don't forget to restore the talkpages as well.

To volunteer to reference one or more of the articles that have recently been deleted as unreferenced BLPs, see AIT volunteers.

[[Image:Nuvola apps kdmconfig.png|28px|2 people]] Participants
To join, simply add your name to our membership list; feel free to add your ideas to the project discussion page as well.

User boxes
ARS user page boxes:


 * User Article Rescue Squadron

– There's an automatically-generated list of members using this banner here.

Once you've rescued an article or two, show your Rescue Squadron pride with

(where n is the number of articles you've helped rescue) – There's an automatically-generated list list of members using this banner here.
 *  


 *  To invite someone: 

To invite someone to join the Article Rescue Squadron, you can use our handy invite by pasting Article Rescue Squadron invite to their userpage.

Barnstars
There are four specific Rescue Barnstars for anyone who has made significant contributions to rescuing articles; it is up to those awarding them to choose which one to use:


 * Hall of fame:


 * Wikipedia: Article Rescue Squadron – Hall of Fame/Award

Templates
See Wikipedia: Article Rescue Squadron – Templates for ARS templates.

Reasons to retain content

 * It can be discouraging for an editor to have their article deleted, especially for new and first-time contributors. An alternative is Userfication, in which articles for deletion can be placed into a user's namespace, providing an option to improve an article to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines.
 * Instead of deleting articles altogether, they can be merged with other articles (see Mergism).
 * It can be frustrating for a reader to come to Wikipedia for information and inside find that the relevant article existed at one point but has been deleted. This discourages both Wikipedia readership and authorship.
 * Deleting a well-written, well-sourced article on the basis of what Wikipedia is not can reduce the total information of Wikipedia.

Related projects

 * Wikipedia: Article Incubator
 * WikiProject Abandoned Articles
 * WikiProject Deletion


 * WikiProject Deletion sorting
 * WikiProject Inclusion
 * WikiProject Notability

Essays, etc.

 * All human knowledge
 * Archimedes was deleted
 * Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
 * Article rescue contest
 * Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia
 * Don't be an ostrich
 * Don't Destroy


 * Deletion review is broken: An analysis of 2007 deletion reviews
 * Give an article a chance
 * Inclusionist's Guide To Deletion Debates
 * Potential, not just current state
 * The Heymann Standard – describes the amount of work needed on a page to convince an editor to change their vote from "delete" or "neutral" to "keep" in an Articles for deletion debate.
 * There is no deadline